Strasbourg, 12/12/2012 (Agence Europe) - MEPs rejected the Commission proposal on ground handling services as it stands but are prepared to re-examine it.
On Wednesday 12 December they voted to reject this first version of the airport package by 392 votes against and 272 votes in its favour. Nonetheless, MEPs agreed for the Parliamentary committee to examine more closely the question of liberalising this market (496 for, 157 against). Threats to withdraw this package in the event of rejection, brandished by Commissioner for transport Siim Kallas, therefore did have an effect on the decisions made by MEPs. With a return to the committee, the Commissioner remains willing to collaborate. The two other reports making up the airport package will continue their legislative procedure, although Parliament has watered down the Commission's initial goals on noise and slot allocation. This package aims to improve the quality and capacity of European airports, of which around 20 will be close to saturation point over the next few years.
Ground handling services. A number of MEPs did not hesitate to describe this as the worst proposal the Commission has ever presented and it did not receive a vote in first reading. The report on ground handling services plans to open up ground handling services to a minimum of three operators for five specific services, in airports used by more than 5 million passengers a year (as opposed to the current 2 million). MEPs voted against this report but will analyse it in more detail at a later date. Kallas subsequently stated that he was prepared to continue working with MEPs and explained, “We need to work further to find common ground to tackle the problems of quality and efficiency in ground handling. 70% of delays happen on the ground not in the air - those problems will not go away on their own. I am fully committed to work with the European Parliament to find a way forwards”.
The author of the report, Artur Zasada (EPP, Poland), confirmed that, “I am convinced that the European Parliament did the right thing by not rejecting the Commission's proposal on the liberalisation of ground handling services in EU airports. We can achieve a better result by pursuing discussions in committee, rather than rejecting it at first reading. This would have been a missed opportunity”. The first directive on this subject dates back to 1996. Although for the EPP and S&D it is a good exit strategy, the Greens/EFA would have preferred not to hear any more about this proposal.
MEPs had to confront heavy lobbying on the subject from both the airports and airlines but it appears that they paid more attention to demands from the unions. The latter are delighted with this turn of events in the legislative procedure and the second round in the committee may guarantee them more social rights. Kallas declared on twitter that the results were, “a victory for common sense over narrow lobby interests”.
Airport slots. The two other votes on the rest of the airport package went off without any major hitch but MEPs unravelled a significant part of the proposals put on the table by the Commission. On the subject of landing and taking off slots for airlines, the proposals aim to increase airport capacity without building new infrastructure but by amending the allocation rules. The report on the subject was adopted by 565 votes for, 69 against, with 26 abstentions.
Contrary to the wishes of the Commission, MEPs were unwilling to look at the use of the “used or lost” rule, which stands at 80% for a slot and is in force at an international level (the Commission wanted a figure of 85%). They maintained the current model for many seasonal slots, which the Commission was also reviewing. Nonetheless, they have indeed endorsed a secondary slot market between airlines, which is the equivalent of an increase of 14 million passengers. Similarly to the Council, parliament included a safeguard clause to protect regional links. They also advocate tougher sanctions against airlines that do not use slots and/ or put them back in the common pot later (a planned increase of 3.7 million passengers). The victory for rapporteur Giommaria Uggias (ALDE, Italy) also consists in being able to have introduced a legal definition for hourly slots so that, “Slots will no longer be considered simply as an asset reserved to air carriers but a public utility to be used to the benefit of all users and operators of airports”. The adoption of his report makes the allocation of slots more transparent, particularly by ensuring the independence of coordinators with respect to the airport and transport carriers.
Noise pollution. MEPs were reassured that the Commission would not interfere with national decisions to reduce air traffic when providing protection to people living close to airports. In its report adopted by 501 votes in favour, 155 votes against, with 8 abstentions, Jörg Leichtfried (S&D, Austria) provided assurances that the Commission would be informed about decisions reached locally and that it could comment on them but not that it would be able to amend them as it had sought. The Commission also wanted to immediately ban the noisiest planes from European airports. The MEPs granted a period of four years for this. The Greens at the European Parliament did not vote in favour of this report but would have liked the damaging effects of noise on health to have been better taken into consideration. (MD/transl.fl)